Dear Sir,
Upon reviewing your site as further reading for a class in
school, I must
say I'm a little unclear as to why you labeled Unitarian
Universalists as
a cult. So far your logic seems rather flawed.
As a 17 year old who is
trying desperately to understand the way the universe
works and where I
fit in it, I was rather shocked that you would call the
Unitarian
Universalist Church dangerous.
The Unitarian
Universalist movement mainly stresses people to search out
and discover for
themselves how they can best relate to God. It also
stresses tolerance
in its followers, which is something that is very
important in this day and
age.
Sir, what if the Bible is not the word of God? It was written
at the
council of Nicea by many powerful bishops of the time, not directly by
God
Himself. I think that taking the general message of the Bible is
far more
important than picking apart every word. The Bible preaches
peace and the
message of Christ, but as written by the powerful men of the
fourth
century, not written by God directly. There are political
undertones
throughout the entirety of the Bible, sir, potentially put in
place by
powerful political figures of the time, and not by God.
The
reason that I do not believe that UU is a cult is because all they do
is
preach tolerance and beg the followers of UU to seek knowledge and find
God
for themselves. How is this a
cult?
Respectfully,
Caroline
Hi Caroline. Many people ask why we label something as a cult.
We classify any religion that rejects the absolute truth of the Word of God (the
Bible) as a cult, in accordance with the following definition from the
Merriam-Webster Dictionary: "a religion regarded as unorthodox or
spurious". Since we believe absolute truth to be found in the Bible, then
any religion that rejects that truth is false, and therefore, a cult. Some
people may define cult differently, but that is the definition we use when
classifying Unitarian Universalism as a cult. I encourage you to read the
following articles. The first addresses why we do what we do, whereas the
second article addresses some of the specific UU beliefs that lead us to refer
to them as a cult:
You're a little misguided regarding the writing and transmission of the
Bible. You said the Bible was written by powerful bishops at the Council
of Nicea. That's actually not true. The Old Testament of the Bible
was written by prophets between about 1400 B.C. and 400 B.C. The New
Testament of the Bible was written by Apostles and Jesus' disciples between
about A.D. 50 and A.D. 95. There were two Councils of Nicea. The
first Council of Nicea (A.D. 325) was convened to counter the Arian heresy that
denied the deity of Jesus Christ. This council reaffirmed the
Trinity. The Second Council of Nicea (A.D. 787) was convened to address
the matter of iconoclasm. The councils addressed other minor issues, such
as whether or not bishops should be paid, but these matters were the crux of the
Nicene councils. Now, I think you're referring to the Council of Hippo
(A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397). These councils were
convened to decide the canon of Scripture. None of the Bible was written
at these councils. The Bible had been complete, and the individual books
were used by concensus for a few centuries at this point. These councils
undertook to decide which of these books were historically accurate, agreed with
accepted Scripture, had a certain authorship, and carried apostolic authority,
among other things. However, I must repeat, the Bible had been complete
for a few centuries by this point (since. A.D. 95). Now, we can be sure
that this is true, as ancient biblical manuscripts, dating to the first and
second century have been found. Foreign translations of the biblical books
have been found from the early centuries, and if we didn't have any ancient
biblical manuscripts, we could reconstruct 98% of the New Testament simply from
assembling the passages quoted by early church fathers.
The Bible was written by men, but they wrote it under the direct
inspiration of God. 2 Peter 1:21 says, "For prophecy never had its
origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by
the Holy Spirit." 2 Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is
Godbreathed (inspired) and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting
and training in righteousness". Now I'm not a person led by blind
faith. I'm dismayed by those who are. However, the advanced
scientific knowledge revealed in the Old and New Testament, coupled with the
historical accuracy of the Bible and the PRECISE fulfillment of prophetcy leads
any thinking, reasonable person to conclude that the Bible is the product of
divine inspiration. The mathematical probability against the precise
fulfillment of these prophecies makes it an essential impossibility, but it
happened. We're not talking about vague "horoscope" type predicitions
either, for which it is relatively easy to find a fulfillment. Please read
the articles above. I hope they answer your questions.
In Christ,
Ben Rast
Contender Ministries